In some parts of the country, disposal capacity may be limited in existing municipal or hazardous waste landfills, and it may be difficult to site new local disposal facilities.

This may lead to increased impacts on communities. It is understood that dredging will result in some level of uncertainty associated with estimating re-suspension and residual levels of contaminants post-dredging.ĭredging also creates the need for transport, storage, treatment (where applicable), and disposal facilities. The primary negative associated with sediment removal is that it is typically far more complex and costly than other alternatives.

Although it has been documented that, even after dredging, bioaccumulative contaminants often result in fish consumption advisories for a long period of time after sediment removal and other types of institutional controls might also be required. Removing contaminated sediment rather than managing it in place can also provide more flexibility regarding future use of the water body.

This is because the contaminants are removed from the aquatic ecosystem and disposed in a controlled environment. EPA’s 2005 guidance document for Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites, dredging as a remedy provides the following primary advantages and limitations:ĭredging and excavation often can achieve cleanup levels for the site with the least uncertainty regarding future environmental exposure to contaminants.

What is dredging